Reconsidering the ruling on Khorne?
Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2015 3:21 am
Prove itlegowarrior wrote:Look, the game lack any semblance of balance as it stands today
Discuss Fantasy football-style board games - GW's Blood Bowl, Impact!'s Elfball, Privateer Press' Grind, Heresy's Deathball, etc. THIS IS NOT AN NFL FANTASY FOOTBALL SITE!
https://www.talkfantasyfootball.org/
https://www.talkfantasyfootball.org/viewtopic.php?f=81&t=40363
Prove itlegowarrior wrote:Look, the game lack any semblance of balance as it stands today
The funny part is that you think that's a problem for ME when in reality it is a problem for YOU. Swaying your opinion isn't particularly important: the truth is the truth, and an inability to see the forest for the trees is a weakness in the observer not the forest. If you're unable to get past what you perceive to be unacceptable rudeness then you're simply remaining ignorant. Who do you think that's hurting, exactly?straume wrote:Each to his own, I guess. The way I see it there are two problems with this approach:
1) It is rude. I am probably a bit to tender for the Interwebs, but I just don`t get how people assume it is okay to act like a jackass on a forum.
2) Any sound argument which might be there is diminished/drowned because of 1.
Only if you're in highschool, drinking at a biker bar, or are a member of the lower class. In the real world, outside the slums, people don't throw punches because regardless of what sort of offense you took, violence puts you in jail. Additionally, most professionals in any position you should care about will have a fairly thick skin as they wouldn't have gotten there without it.Regash wrote:Do that IRL, face to face with people who know who you are, where you live and maybe be in a position to get revenge...
It's not balanced. It does come down to how we define balance, though... if you get creative enough with the definition then you can say it is!harvestmouse wrote:The game lacks balance, is an equally absurd conjecture. The game is naturally pretty balanced.
But namecalling on the internet, that is the adult way to do it? Simple fact: How you behave will affect how people will assess you and your points. This is true in real life and also on a internet forum.VoodooMike wrote: The funny part is that you think that's a problem for ME when in reality it is a problem for YOU.
If your life is governed by butthurt, and your opinion of how worthwhile someone's thoughts and opinions are is based on how nice they are to you, you're essentially a child.
Awesome defintion! So we can also say a fist-fight between a 75 lbs kid and a 150 lbs bully is balanced, just balanced in favour of the former losing his lunch money!harvestmouse wrote:Well that's a 50/50 balance.
A pretty good job of what? I mean, we have no real data from environments where inducements aren't used, but we don't see inducements compensating for the difference in TV levels in any environment we DO have data from. What are they doing a good job of? Promoting the "balance" that we're defining as the game being balanced in favour of TV underdogs losing?harvestmouse wrote:Inducments were never meant to balance things 50/50, but I think they do a pretty good job.
Well, we can actually test that idea by looking at relationship between TV difference and match victory for rosters you consider to be "balanced". Maybe that's some good first homework for this thread's herpderp squad and their newly downloaded stats programs!harvestmouse wrote:I'd also say the more balanced the roster (by that I mean the more spread of skills and diversity of play) the better inducements work.
It's what's used in all common environments as a means of determining inducements. If it doesn't work for inducements then that's a balance issue with the game as a whole.harvestmouse wrote:However as I said I think there are massive floors with the TV system.
Well, obviously it is since I'm both an adult and calling someone names on the internet, right? To be honest, I find adults are far more liberal with their namecalling and insulting in the real world than children are - children are worried about getting in trouble, adults are not.straume wrote:But namecalling on the internet, that is the adult way to do it?
Simpler fact: how people assess you and your points only matters during a popularity contest. The truth value of someone's point will not change based on how likable you consider them to be... if you find it does then it should raise alarm bells for you... about you.straume wrote:Simple fact: How you behave will affect how people will assess you and your points.
It again comes down to the context. I'm already taken seriously by the people who matter. Why? Not because I'm a nice guy.. I'm not.. it's because I've conclusively demonstrated my competence in various topics. Being demonstrably right trumps liberally distributed hand-jobs in the long run. People whose views on whether I'm right or wrong are based on peripheral things like how nice and polite I am are already people we know don't care much about what's true... so what use are they to anybody?straume wrote:Swaying my opinion might not be important to you, but I would assume being taken seriously matters? Just a little bit? If not, fine. And I will actually give you a point in that it is indeed my problem if I miss a gold nugget hidden in your posts. If that be the case then I am sure I can live on and cope with it blissfully ignorant.
I'm quite able to see truth in a situation and make an objective definition of the worth of that truth. I can also make an objective assessment of a messenger and I'm afraid the delivery of truth in no way invalidates my assessment of the messenger and whether they are due any respect.VoodooMike wrote:It again comes down to the context. I'm already taken seriously by the people who matter. Why? Not because I'm a nice guy.. I'm not.. it's because I've conclusively demonstrated my competence in various topics. Being demonstrably right trumps liberally distributed hand-jobs in the long run. People whose views on whether I'm right or wrong are based on peripheral things like how nice and polite I am are already people we know don't care much about what's true... so what use are they to anybody?
Is it?harvestmouse wrote: Resurrection though, is an extremely balanced game in my opinion. So is playing TV with well balanced rosters.
It is all very well saying that a team is good at a certain TV. But if they are rarely able to maintain that TV that wouldn't make them a good team.legowarrior wrote:Do we really care what they will do over careers? There is no balance to the teams or to the skills at all, so just look at have the win ratios look at a particular tv point. Do the new win ratios met the criteria? KISS
Not the former but certainly the latter. Given that all the environments that are commonly used anywhere use the inducement rules it's a bit silly to claim the game is balanced if the handicapping system always used is unbalanced. Additionally, we have data from environments other than matchmaking and they continue to show that different rosters enjoy different levels of success... so we can't claim those are balanced.harvestmouse wrote:You're talking about match making and handicapping.
If there's no balance when TV is different... and no balance when rosters are different... what are you claiming is balanced about the game?harvestmouse wrote:I'm talking about it being a beautifully balanced game, how it plays, the opportunities and the weight of options. It is a very well balanced game.
So, give you a team and let you choose the composition of your opponent's team, and it'll be a balanced game? Does that ever happen in the actual game in any environment? Maybe single player on Cyanide? I bet you could give Cyanide's AI a competitive game, certainly!harvestmouse wrote:You give me a rookie 1250 TV Norse team that can only take linos and give me inducements and I'll give any player with a high TV team in the world a good competitive game, providing their team is well balanced. By that I mean, building for weight not min-max, playing a healthy mix of games, having a healthy turn over of players and doesn't have any broken combos.
Outside of your masturbatory fantasies it is not a seller's market when it comes to your esteem and association. If you get the message from what's said then the rest of it doesn't matter to anyone but you.Loki wrote:I'm quite able to see truth in a situation and make an objective definition of the worth of that truth. I can also make an objective assessment of a messenger and I'm afraid the delivery of truth in no way invalidates my assessment of the messenger and whether they are due any respect.
I wonder how you measure this.... You're the data guy.The simple fact is this: NTBB has, across the past 2-3 years, lost the majority of the confidence and support it had from people online.
It has ammounted to people trying them and having fun.it will amount to nothing in the end... much like NTBB has
In 2013 I did. Because I thought you had a valid point. There was data available that previously hadn't been.At the end of the day it comes down to whether or not you think your snake oil is going to be affected by what people like me or dode say about it. I suspect it will, and so do you.